Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 28 Feb 2013 (Thursday) 23:36
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Replace my nifty 250?

 
boufa
Senior Member
Avatar
494 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Lake County, OH
     
Feb 28, 2013 23:36 |  #1

I have a nifty 250 (55-250 IS). It fits in the middle of the collection I currently have (see bottom). I was thinking of upgrading the glass. Keeping the same general range. Maybe dipping down into the 18 or 24 range, and up towards 200 or 250. Any thoughts?

Need to keep it as far under $1000 as possible. Looking for good glass, as in the last upgrade I might realistically need in this range type upgrade. Definitely want USM and IS.


Canon EOS 7D & 40D | Σ 10-20mm Wigma | Σ 150-600mm | Σ 18-250mm Macro | Canon 18-135 STM | Canon 55-250 STM
Gallery/Website/Blog - TowPathPhoto (external link)
Social Media - - - on Flickr (external link) . . . on Twitter (external link)
Creator of @OhioBirdAlert (external link) on Twitter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Ilovetheleafs
Raising uninteresting to new levels
907 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 30
Joined Jul 2011
     
Feb 28, 2013 23:42 |  #2

sigma 18 - 200, got one its great and it'd be all in one.


Canon Rebel XS gripped, Canon 18 - 55mm, Sigma 18 - 200mm f3.5 - f6.3 DC OS HSM,Sigma 50mm f1.4 Olympus TG-810 Tough, LowePro Classified 160AW, Canon 430EX II Flash, Kata E-702

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Richie3888
Member
235 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2013
     
Feb 28, 2013 23:55 |  #3

70-200mm 2.8 non is?


Body: T3I Gripped
Lens:17-55mm 2.8 | 70-200mm f/4L | 10-22 | 85mm 1.8 | 100mm macro
580 EX II, Manfrotto 055XPROB Tripod w/ 498RC2/ Rode videomic pro
Feedback 1.
Feedback 2.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
samsen
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,468 posts
Likes: 239
Joined Apr 2006
Location: LA
     
Feb 28, 2013 23:58 |  #4

Another vote for 70-200L But I say go for NonIS F4.
Budgetwise its wiser.
Qualitywise its the same.
Much lighter.


Weak retaliates,
Strong Forgives,
Intelligent Ignores!
Samsen
Picture editing OK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,062 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2314
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Mar 01, 2013 00:13 |  #5

i wouldn't bother going to an 18-200mm lens...not much of an upgrade really


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raksphoto
Senior Member
479 posts
Gallery: 18 photos
Likes: 69
Joined Jun 2010
Location: California
     
Mar 01, 2013 02:26 |  #6

samsen wrote in post #15663655 (external link)
Another vote for 70-200L But I say go for NonIS F4.
Budgetwise its wiser.
Qualitywise its the same.
Much lighter.

I agree, and actually did that. Awesome quality for the price.


2x 7D Mark II | 70D | 5DSr
EF-S 10-18mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM |
EF-S 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM | EF 70-200mm f/4L |
EF 135mm f/2L | EF 100mm f/2 | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 50mm f/1.2L | EF 35mm f/1.4L EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM MACRO

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chrismarriott66
Senior Member
Avatar
797 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 4
Joined Jan 2012
Location: York, UK
     
Mar 01, 2013 03:52 |  #7

boufa wrote in post #15663615 (external link)
Definitely want USM and IS.

The non-IS f2.8 or f4 don't really fit this criteria... you could go for the 70-200 f4 IS though


Chris Marriott Photography (external link)| Facebook (external link)
Complete Gear | 1ds iii | 5d iii | 50d | EF 16-35 f2.8 L USM ii | EF 24-70 f2.8 L USM | Σ 70-200 f2.8 ii EX DG HSM | Σ 35mm f1.4 Art | EF 50mm f1.4 USM | EF 85mm f1.8 USM | EF 85mm f1.2 L USM ii | 600EX-RT | 580EX ii | 430EX ii | YN622Cs |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boufa
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
494 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Lake County, OH
     
Mar 01, 2013 08:18 as a reply to  @ chrismarriott66's post |  #8

I am intrigued by the first idea. I would be ok losing a lens. I know combining lenses into a super zoom doesn't always work out well. Since I got the 150-500 I find that I am not using the middle range as much. There are times however when I would maybe want it, to avoid the size of the 500. A single lens that cover the entire range is an upgrade if the iq is the same.

Started researching the 18-250 macro by sigma. It's got the range and the macro would be something I don't have now, in a single lens solution.


Canon EOS 7D & 40D | Σ 10-20mm Wigma | Σ 150-600mm | Σ 18-250mm Macro | Canon 18-135 STM | Canon 55-250 STM
Gallery/Website/Blog - TowPathPhoto (external link)
Social Media - - - on Flickr (external link) . . . on Twitter (external link)
Creator of @OhioBirdAlert (external link) on Twitter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 01, 2013 08:49 |  #9

boufa wrote in post #15664297 (external link)
I am intrigued by the first idea. I would be ok losing a lens. I know combining lenses into a super zoom doesn't always work out well. Since I got the 150-500 I find that I am not using the middle range as much. There are times however when I would maybe want it, to avoid the size of the 500. A single lens that cover the entire range is an upgrade if the iq is the same.

Started researching the 18-250 macro by sigma. It's got the range and the macro would be something I don't have now, in a single lens solution.

keep doing the research. Usually the "IQ" is not the same and the aperture is smaller at the same focal lengths.
here's one comparison site
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=5​&APIComp=2 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ilovetheleafs
Raising uninteresting to new levels
907 posts
Gallery: 20 photos
Likes: 30
Joined Jul 2011
     
Mar 01, 2013 21:29 |  #10

boufa wrote in post #15664297 (external link)
I am intrigued by the first idea. I would be ok losing a lens. I know combining lenses into a super zoom doesn't always work out well. Since I got the 150-500 I find that I am not using the middle range as much. There are times however when I would maybe want it, to avoid the size of the 500. A single lens that cover the entire range is an upgrade if the iq is the same.

Started researching the 18-250 macro by sigma. It's got the range and the macro would be something I don't have now, in a single lens solution.

if you want to see what the 18 - 200 can do just let me know and I'll show you some of the images I have gotten out of my copy. I've no real experience with the 18 - 250 though, I will say I did test it out and something just felt "right" with the 18 - 200 I tried and bought. Is it a bit of a compromise? Sure, but all gear is, just have to find the ways to either avoid said weaknesses of the gear or find work-arounds.


Canon Rebel XS gripped, Canon 18 - 55mm, Sigma 18 - 200mm f3.5 - f6.3 DC OS HSM,Sigma 50mm f1.4 Olympus TG-810 Tough, LowePro Classified 160AW, Canon 430EX II Flash, Kata E-702

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boufa
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
494 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Lake County, OH
     
Mar 02, 2013 16:03 |  #11

Ilovetheleafs wrote in post #15666984 (external link)
if you want to see what the 18 - 200 can do just let me know and I'll show you some of the images I have gotten out of my copy. I've no real experience with the 18 - 250 though, I will say I did test it out and something just felt "right" with the 18 - 200 I tried and bought. Is it a bit of a compromise? Sure, but all gear is, just have to find the ways to either avoid said weaknesses of the gear or find work-arounds.

Thanks, your samples, while I am sure are nice, won't be relevant. I am definitely not getting the 18-200. Different versions of the same lens, or similar lenses can be drastically different from each other.

I have read some reviews that say that while there are compromises in a super zoom, those compromises are shrinking every day. That the 18-250 is actually short on compromises. I could probably afford the 70-200 L, but honestly, I don't see my self using it. (same problem I have with the 55-250) It is in the middle of the focal range. when I am at a family function, I go for the wide lens, I know that will cover most shots. When I am in the wild, I go with the 150-500, since that will be what makes me photo ready most often.

I would have to stop, change lenses, and purposely switch to the 55-250, (or the 70-200) and I just don't see this happening.

Now, a 18-250, would be the type of lens that could stay on in the car. (The 150-500 is just too big to throw around out the window at random.) Shooting targets of opportunity, and or family.

Of course no one is arguing the potential usefulness of that range of zoom.. only the IQ. So people who think that the super zoom idea will produce poor quality images, simply on the premise that it is a super zoom... what do you think of the IQ on the 55-250 canon? So that we can compare apples to apples.


Canon EOS 7D & 40D | Σ 10-20mm Wigma | Σ 150-600mm | Σ 18-250mm Macro | Canon 18-135 STM | Canon 55-250 STM
Gallery/Website/Blog - TowPathPhoto (external link)
Social Media - - - on Flickr (external link) . . . on Twitter (external link)
Creator of @OhioBirdAlert (external link) on Twitter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Mar 02, 2013 16:31 |  #12

boufa wrote in post #15669208 (external link)
Of course no one is arguing the potential usefulness of that range of zoom.. only the IQ. So people who think that the super zoom idea will produce poor quality images, simply on the premise that it is a super zoom... what do you think of the IQ on the 55-250 canon? So that we can compare apples to apples.

most of the superzooms don't produce poor quality images, it's just not as sharp as the 18-55IS and 55-250IS combination but pretty close. Keep the 55-250IS until you upgrade with a quality telephoto - 70-200, 100-400, etc.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
boufa
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
494 posts
Likes: 18
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Lake County, OH
     
Mar 02, 2013 16:35 |  #13

watt100 wrote in post #15669305 (external link)
most of the superzooms don't produce poor quality images, it's just not as sharp as the 18-55IS and 55-250IS combination but pretty close. Keep the 55-250IS until you upgrade with a quality telephoto - 70-200, 100-400, etc.

The whole point of this thread is that I have a Sigma 150-500, that is making the 55-250 expendable.


Canon EOS 7D & 40D | Σ 10-20mm Wigma | Σ 150-600mm | Σ 18-250mm Macro | Canon 18-135 STM | Canon 55-250 STM
Gallery/Website/Blog - TowPathPhoto (external link)
Social Media - - - on Flickr (external link) . . . on Twitter (external link)
Creator of @OhioBirdAlert (external link) on Twitter

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pulsar123
Goldmember
2,139 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 460
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Canada
     
Mar 02, 2013 18:54 |  #14

It sounds you don't actually need the 55-250 range. Upgrade you kit lens to something like Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS, your lens lineup will be much more even.


6D, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, 135L, 70-200 f4L, Laowa 15mm 1:1 macro, 50mm f1.8 STM, Samyang 8mm fisheye, home studio

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Mar 02, 2013 19:51 |  #15

What about something along the lines of a 24-105 or the 15-85? I don't think you'd really miss the 106-149 or 86-149 range very much.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,215 views & 0 likes for this thread
Replace my nifty 250?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Car147
939 guests, 208 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.